SDH-deficient renal cell carcinoma: A case report associated with a novel germline mutation.

The highly syndromic nature of succinate dehydrogenase-deficient RCCs constitutes their active surveillance and molecular profiling the alpha and omega.

Effects of irrigation parameters and access sheath size on the intra-renal temperature during flexible ureteroscopy with a high-power laser.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effect of different laser power settings on intra-renal temperature (IRT) under different irrigation conditions during flexible ureteroscopy (FURS) in a live-anesthetized porcine model. METHODS: Following ethics approval, 2 female pigs weighing ~ 28 kg were used. Under general anesthesia, a percutaneous access was obtained to fix a K-type thermocouple inside the pelvi-calyceal system for real-time recording of IRT during FURS without UAS, UAS-10/12, UAS-12/14, and UAS-14/16F. A high-power holmium laser was used and the IRT was recorded during laser activation for up to 60 s at a laser power of 20 W, 40 W, and 60 W under gravity irrigation and manual pump irrigation. RESULTS: Under gravity irrigation, FURS without UAS was associated with hazardous IRT at a laser power as low as 20 W for as short as 20 s of laser activation. The IRT was rendered borderline when UAS was used. This UAS buffering effect disappeared with the use of higher laser-power settings (40 W and 60 W) with the maximal IRT exceeding 60 °C. Moreover, laser activation at 60 W was associated with very rapid increase in IRT within few seconds. Under pump irrigation, laser activation at the highest power setting (60 W) for 60 s was associated with a safe IRT, even without the use of UAS. The maximal IRT was below 45 °C. CONCLUSION: The use of high-power Ho:YAG laser carries potentially harmful thermal effect when used under gravity irrigation, even when large-diameter UAS is used. High-power settings (> 40 W) require high irrigation flow. The use of UAS is advisable to reduce the IRT and balance any intra-renal pressure increase.

Lasers for stone treatment: how safe are they?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To update laser lithotripsy advances in regard to new laser types and technologies as well as review contemporary laser safety concerns. RECENT FINDINGS: The high prevalence of urolithiasis and the continuing miniaturization of scopes has encouraged the growth of laser lithotripsy technology. The holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet (Ho:YAG) laser has been used for over 20 years in endourology and has been extensively studied. Holmium laser power output is affected by a number of factors, including pulse energy, pulse frequency, and pulse width. Several recent experimental studies suggest that the new dual-phase Moses 'pulse modulation' technology, introduced in high-power laser machines, carries a potential to increase stone ablation efficiency and decrease stone retropulsion. A newly introduced thulium fiber laser (TFL) has been adapted to a very small laser fiber size and is able to generate very low pulse energy and very high pulse frequency. Both of these technologies promise to play a larger role in laser lithotripsy in the near future. However, more experimental and clinical studies are needed to expand on these early experimental findings. Even though laser lithotripsy is considered safe, precautions should be taken to avoid harmful or even catastrophic adverse events to the patient or the operating room staff. SUMMARY: The Ho:YAG laser remains the clinical gold standard for laser lithotripsy for over the last two decades. High-power Ho:YAG laser machines with Moses technology have the potential to decrease stone retropulsion and enhance efficiency of laser ablation. The new TFL has a potential to compete with and perhaps even replace the Ho:YAG laser for laser lithotripsy. Safety precautions should be taken into consideration during laser lithotripsy.

The Effect of Irrigation Power and Ureteral Access Sheath Diameter on the Maximal Intra-Pelvic Pressure During Ureteroscopy: In Vivo Experimental Study in a Live Anesthetized Pig.

Objectives: To assess the effect of irrigation settings and the size of ureteral access sheath (UAS) on the maximal intra-pelvic pressure (IPPmax) during ureteroscopy (URS) in pigs. Materials and Methods: In supine position, three anesthetized female pigs underwent cystoscopy to insert a 6F ureteral catheter in each ureter. Pigs were then turned to prone position to establish a percutaneous access, insert a 10F nephrostomy tube in the kidney, and connect it to a urodynamic device. An 8F semi-rigid ureteroscope or the Flex-X2 Flexible Ureteroscope was used with two irrigation settings: gravity flow and manual pumping using a commercial pump. URS was performed without UAS and with the UAS 9.5/11, 12/14, 14/16 at the ureteropelvic junction and the IPPmax was recorded. Results: Under gravity irrigation, the recorded IPPmax during semi-rigid URS in the distal ureter and the renal pelvis was 0 and 30 cmH2O, respectively. Further, the IPPmax during flexible URS in the renal pelvis without UAS, with UAS 9.5/11.5, with UAS 12/14, and with UAS 14/16 was 23, 6, 2, and 1 cmH2O, respectively. Under manual pumping, the IPPmax during semi-rigid URS in the distal ureter and the renal pelvis was 84 and 105 cmH2O, respectively. Further, the IPPmax during flexible URS in the renal pelvis without UAS, with UAS 9.5/11.5, with UAS 12/14, and with UAS 14/16 was 45, 46, 18, and 1 cmH2O, respectively. Conclusion: Manual pumping can significantly increase the IPPmax to unsafe levels during URS. The UAS can significantly decrease the IPPmax, even under manual pumping. The larger the UAS, the lower the IPPmax. The use of UAS can render URS safer by acting as a safeguard against the consequences of increased IPP, even under forced irrigation.

Robot-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy by an Extraperitoneal Approach.

The incidence of symptomatic benign prostate hyperplasia and bladder outlet obstruction has increased during the last two decades. Most of men are treated conservatively. When medical therapy is inadequate to relief symptoms, surgical treatment is necessary. Absolute indications for surgical treatment are gross hematuria, recurrent urinary infections and retentions as well as bladder stones. With advent of minimally invasive surgery, large prostates tend to be treated either endoscopically or laparoscopically (including robotic assistance). Herein, the robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy is described.

The Decline of Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Surgery: A Survey of the Endourological Society to Identify Shortcomings and Guidance for Future Directions.

INTRODUCTION: To analyze the most recent temporal trends in the adoption of urologic laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS), to identify the perceived limitations associated with its decline, and to determine factors that might revive the role of LESS in the field of minimally invasive urologic surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 15 question survey was created and sent to members of the Endourological Society in September 2016. Only members who performed LESS procedures in practice were asked to respond. RESULTS: In total, 106 urologists responded to the survey. Most of the respondents were from the United States (35%) and worked in an academic hospital (84.9%). Standard LESS was the most popular approach (78.1%), while 14.3% used robotics, and 7.6% used both. 2009 marked the most popular year to perform the initial (27.6%) and the majority (20%) of LESS procedures. The most common LESS procedure was a radical/simple nephrectomy (51%) followed by pyeloplasty (17.3%). In the past 12 months, 60% of respondents had performed no LESS procedures. Compared to conventional laparoscopy, respondents only believed cosmesis to be better, however, this enthusiasm waned over time. Worsening shifts in enthusiasm for LESS also occurred with patient desire, marketability, cost, safety, and robotic adaptability. The highest rated factor to help LESS regain popularity was a new robotic platform. CONCLUSION: The decline of LESS is apparent, with few urologists continuing to perform procedures attributed to multiple factors. The availability of a purpose-built robotic platform and better instrumentation might translate into a renewed future interest of LESS.

Acute focal bacterial nephritis is associated with invasive diagnostic procedures - a cohort of 138 cases extracted through a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Acute focal bacterial nephritis (AFBN) is a rare disease currently described only in case reports and small case series. In this study we summarize the clinical features of AFBN as has been documented in the literature and draw recommendations on the proper diagnosis and therapy. METHODS: A systematic literature review was undertaken in PUBMED, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library online databases for relevant literature on AFBN in adults. RESULTS: Literature review revealed a total of 38 articles according to our inclusion criteria, of which we could extract data from 138 cases of AFBN. Fever (98%) and flank pain (80%) were most commonly reported symptoms. E. coli was the most frequent pathogen. Diagnosis was set by CT and/or MRI (52%) with or without sonography or by sonography alone (20%) as well as by sonography combined with IVU. In total, sonography was applied in 83% of cases. All but one patient received antibiotic treatment. Kidney lesions were occasionally mistaken for neoplasms or renal abscesses and as a result, cases were subjected to percutaneous puncture (12.3%), surgical exploration (5.1%) and partial or radical nephrectomy (4.4%). Four cases (2.9%) developed a renal abscess. CONCLUSIONS: The diagnosis of AFBN is set by characteristic clinico-radiological findings. Differential diagnoses of this interstitial bacterial infection include renal abscess and tumor. Correct diagnosis is occasionally impeded by atypical symptoms. Invasive diagnostic and therapeutic procedures should be limited as the majority of cases respond well to conservative treatment.

Rigid-only versus combined rigid and flexible percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) is usually performed worldwide with a rigid-only antegrade approach. Daily practice suggests that adding flexible nephroscopy and/or ureteroscopy to conventional rigid PNL might improve its efficacy and safety, but available evidence is weak. Appraisal of reliable outcomes of such PNL techniques would better guide intraoperative choices and optimize surgical results. Therefore, our objective was to systematically review relevant literature comparing the outcomes of rigid-only PNL and combined flexible PNLs (adding flexible nephroscopy and/or flexible ureteroscopy) for the treatment of large and/or complex upper urinary tract calculi, with regard to efficacy and safety. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Ovid MedLine, PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases were searched in August 2016 to identify relevant studies. Article selection was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis criteria. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Six articles reporting on 666 patients were included: two randomized controlled trials, two retrospective comparative studies and two case series ≥50 patients (one prospective and one retrospective). A narrative synthesis of minor evidences was also prepared. The adjunct of flexible nephroscopy and/or ureteroscopy provided better stone-free rates (range 86.7-96.97%), through a single percutaneous access most of the times and in any position, reducing the need for second-look procedures. Safety of the combined flexible procedures was improved to a variable degree, with a consensual reduction of the mean hospital stay (range 5.1-7 days). CONCLUSIONS: The current evidence suggests that patients with large and/or complex urolithiasis might benefit from the adjunct of flexible nephroscopy and/or ureteroscopy to rigid PNL.

Acute Focal Bacterial Nephritis Can Lead to Unnecessary Invasive Procedures: A Report of Three Cases.

Acute focal bacterial nephritis (AFBN) is a rarely diagnosed interstitial bacterial infection of the kidney. Due to the non-specific clinical presentation of this entity, correct diagnosis can be challenging. In this work, we present three cases of AFBN aiming to stress the diversity of clinical presentation associated with the disease and the fact that patients with AFBN are at risk of undergoing unnecessary invasive procedures. The employment of invasive diagnostic and therapeutic procedures on the management of AFBN should be limited, as the majority of patients respond well to conservative therapy.

Does the Heat Generation by the Thulium:Yttrium Aluminum Garnet Laser in the Irrigation Fluid Allow Its Use on the Upper Urinary Tract? An Experimental Study.

INTRODUCTION: The current experimental study aimed into evaluating the temperature raise of the irrigation fluid caused by the use of the Thulium:Yttrium aluminum garnet (Tm:YAG) laser. The study setting was designed to replicate conditions of upper urinary tract (UT) surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An experimental setting was designed for the investigation of differences in the temperature of the irrigation fluid in different flow rates, laser power settings, and laser activation times and modes. The experimental configuration included a burette equipped with a micrometric stopcock, a thermocouple, and a modified 40-mL vessel. A Tm:YAG and Holmium:Yttrium aluminum garnet (Ho:YAG) laser devices were used. RESULTS: The Tm:YAG in the continuous mode and in power settings of 5, 10, and 20 W showed similar temperature changes during the 10-minute observation period. The temperatures of the Tm:YAG in the pulsed mode tended to range within similar levels (46.8°C-61°C) with the continuous mode (47.8°C-68°C) when power settings up to 20 W were considered. When the higher power settings (50 and 100 W) were investigated, the temperatures reached were significantly higher in both pulsed and continuous modes. The Ho:YAG showed similar temperatures in comparison to the Tm:YAG in all the flow rates and power settings. The temperatures ranged between 45.6°C and 68.7°C. CONCLUSION: The Tm:YAG in the pulsed and continuous mode with power settings up to 20 W seemed to have potential for UT use. By combining a power setting at the above limit and a low flow rate (as low as 2 mL/minute), it is possible to use the Tm:YAG with safety in terms of temperature.

International Collaboration in Endourology: Multicenter Evaluation of Prestenting for Ureterorenoscopy.

INTRODUCTION: Semirigid and flexible ureterorenoscopy (URS) procedures are safe and efficient treatment options for urolithiasis of all localizations. Sometimes, a Double-J stent is placed in preparation of definitive treatment. The aim of our study was to evaluate the influence of prestenting on the outcome of URS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 565 patients of our prospective, multicenter multinational database who underwent URS for renal or ureteral stones from June 2011 to December 2013. Demographic and stone-related data, surgery time, stone clearance, and complications were evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed comparing the prestented and nonstented groups. RESULTS: Demographic data, stone size, and localization were comparable in both groups. Three hundred twenty-three patients were prestented and 242 nonstented. Overall, prestenting had significant influence on the stone-free rate (SFR) (86% prestented vs 74% not prestented, p = 0.0003) and complication rate (6.5% vs 14.5%, p = 0.003), but not on surgery time (55 ± 36 minutes vs 61 ± 35 minutes, p = 0.071). Subgrouped, this was also true for renal stones (83% vs 60%, p = 0.0001, odds ratio [OR] 3.15; confidence interval, CI [1.77, 5.62]/8.7% vs 19.4%, p = 0.02, 0.39 [CI 0.19, 0.83]). For ureteral stones, there was no significant influence on SFR (94% vs 90%, p = 0.4, OR 1.63 [CI 0.63, 4.22]), but significantly more complications (3.1% vs 10.7%, p = 0.02, OR 0.27 [CI 0.08, 0.86]) in the nonstented group. CONCLUSION: Prestenting positively affects safety and efficacy of URS. This is more pronounced in the treatment of kidney stones compared with ureteral stones. Although the SFR for ureteral stones is comparable without prestenting, the complication rate is higher.

The full metallic double-pigtail ureteral stent: Review of the clinical outcome and current status.

The full metallic double-J ureteral stent (MS) was introduced as a method for providing long-term drainage in malignant ureteral obstruction. Experimental evaluation of the MS revealed that its mechanical features allow efficient drainage in difficult cases, which could not be managed by the insertion of a standard polymeric double-J stent. Clinical experience with the MS showed controversial results. Careful patient selection results in efficient long-term management of malignant ureteral obstruction. The use of the MS should also be considered in selected benign cases. Major complications are uncommon and the minor complications should not hinder its use. Experience in pediatric patients is limited and warrants additional study. The cost-effectiveness of the MS seems to be appropriate for long-term treatment. Further investigation with comparative clinical trials would document the outcome more extensively and establish the indications as well as the selection criteria for the MS.

Extraperitoneal approach for robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To present the experience with the extraperitoneal approach for robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) in a technique replicating the vesicocapsular incision technique of open surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: RASP was performed on patients with a prostate volume of >80 cm(3) with an indication for open enucleation of the prostate. Preoperatively, all patients were evaluated by uroflowmetry, prostate-specific antigen level, and postvoid residual measurement, as well as by the International Prostate Symptom Score questionnaire. All perioperative data were recorded in a prospective database. Follow-up appointments included the aforementioned measurements and were scheduled at 1 and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Ten RASP procedures were successfully performed by the extraperitoneal approach. Mean patient age and prostate volume were 63.1 years (range, 55-74 years) and 129.4 cm(3) (range, 90-170 cm(3)), respectively. Mean operative time was 122.5 minutes (range, 85-140 minutes) and represented the time from the first incision to the closure of the all incisions. The estimated blood loss was minimal (mean value, 230 mL). Transfusions were not necessary. Mean catheterization period was 7.4 days (range, 6-8 days). The symptomatology, as reported by the International Prostate Symptom Score, was improved at the follow-up appointments in comparison with the baseline values. One case of prolonged fever was noted postoperatively and managed by antibiotics. CONCLUSION: The extraperitoneal approach for RASP proved to be efficient in the management of large prostates. The results are directly comparable with the current available experience with transperitoneal RASP. The extraperitoneal RASP seems to favorably compare with the open simple prostatectomy, while the results are at least comparable with those of conventional laparoscopic approach.

'Scarless' laparoscopic urologic surgery by the combination of mini-laparoscopic and laparoendoscopic single-site surgery equipment.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated reconstructive and oncological laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) combined with mini-laparoscopic instruments as standard equipment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 30 patients underwent reconstructive and oncological LESS: mini-laparoscopic-assisted LESS pyeloplasty (LESS-P, n = 18), mini-laparoscopic-assisted LESS partial nephrectomy (LESS-PN, n = 7) or mini-laparoscopic-assisted LESS radical prostatectomy (LESS-RP, n = 5). Perioperative data were prospectively collected. RESULTS: The 18 LESS-P cases had operative times ranging between 120 and 180 min (average 147.9 min). Estimated blood loss ranged between 100 and 300 ml (average 202.1 ml). Two patients required additional management for failed reconstruction. LESS-PN was performed in 7 patients with tumor size ranging between 2.5 and 3.8 cm (average 2.7 cm). Average operative time and blood loss were 155 (140-180) min and 321.4 (250-550) ml, respectively. Renal artery clamping took place in 1 case. LESS-RP was performed in 5 patients; average operative time was 156 (140-180) min and average blood loss 196 (100-400) ml. Functional and oncological outcome was directly comparable to laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. CONCLUSION: The combination of LESS and mini-laparoscopic instrumentation as routine equipment of reconstructive LESS reveals a different perspective for 'scarless' urologic surgery.

Drug-eluting metallic stents in urology.

Drugeluting metal stents (DESs) have been extensively used in coronary and vascular disease. This type of stents has been proven to provide significantly lower restenosis rates due to the reduction of neo-intimal hyperplasia in comparison to the traditionally used bare metal stents (BMSs). The latter stents have been evaluated for more than a decade in urological practice in an attempt to provide permanent relief of urethral or ureteral obstruction. Although the initial results were promising, long-term experience revealed significant complications, which are mainly attributed to stent-related hyperplastic reaction compromising stent patency. The favorable experience of vascular DESs led to the application of DESs in both the urethra and ureter of animal models. These experimental results demonstrated a reduction of hyperplastic reaction of DESs in comparison to BMSs. Nevertheless, clinical data are currently not available. Considering the fact that DESs are under continuous development, the use of DESs in urology holds promise for the future and seems to be an intriguing field.

EAU guidelines on robotic and single-site surgery in urology.

CONTEXT: This is a short version of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on robotic and single-site surgery in urology, as created in 2013 by the EAU Guidelines Office Panel on Urological Technologies. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate current evidence regarding robotic and single-site surgery in urology and to provide clinical recommendations. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive online systematic search of the literature according to Cochrane recommendations was performed in July 2012, identifying data from 1990 to 2012 regarding robotic and single-site surgery in urology. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: There is a lack of high-quality data on both robotic and single-site surgery for most upper and lower urinary tract operations. Mature evidence including midterm follow-up data exists only for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. In the absence of high-quality data, the guidelines panel's recommendations were based mostly on the review of low-level evidence and expert opinions. CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted urologic surgery is an emerging and safe technology for most urologic operations. Further documentation including long-term oncologic and functional outcomes is deemed necessary before definite conclusions can be drawn regarding the superiority or not of robotic assistance compared with the conventional laparoscopic and open approaches. Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery is a novel laparoscopic technique providing a potentially superior cosmetic outcome over conventional laparoscopy. Nevertheless, further advantages offered by this technology are still under discussion and not yet proven. Due to the technically demanding character of the single-site approach, only experienced laparoscopic surgeons should attempt this technique in clinical settings. PATIENT SUMMARY: This work represents the shortened version of the 2013 European Association of Urology guidelines on robotic and single-site surgery. The authors systematically evaluated published evidence in these fields and concluded that robotic assisted surgery is possible and safe for most urologic operations. Whilst laparoendoscopic single-site surgery is performed using the fewest incisions, the balance between risk and benefit is currently unclear. The evidence to support the conclusions in this guideline was generally poor, but best for robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. As such, these recommendations were based upon expert opinion, and further high-quality research is needed in this field.

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery and cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a survey of the current state of laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) and its implementation in the treatment of malignant disease of the urinary tract. Although it is a recent development in the field of laparoscopic surgery with still unproven long-term results, LESS may prove to be more commonly performed in the coming years while managing urologic cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A PubMed search was conducted using the key words laparoendoscopic single-site surgery, LESS, urologic cancer. Relevant articles were reviewed for data on the management of urologic malignancy with LESS. RESULTS: The first articles describing LESS for urologic cancers were published in 2007. Since then, published experience with this technique has increased. LESS has been implemented as an alternative to conventional laparoscopic surgery and open surgery for the treatment of major urologic cancers. The proposed advantages of LESS are the aesthetic benefit of a single incision and a quicker and less painful recovery. Disadvantages are the lack of instrument triangulation, instrument clashing and the steeper learning curve. As this is a fairly recent technical innovation, long-term functional and oncological results for LESS have not yet been published. CONCLUSIONS: LESS is a novel technical advance over conventional laparoscopic surgery, and it can be successfully used in the treatment of patients with urologic cancers. Published data support the feasibility and safety of LESS interventions for major urologic cancers, and newer data may assist in finding LESS's ultimate position among therapeutic options for patients with urologic malignancies.

EAU guidelines on laser technologies.

CONTEXT: The European Association of Urology (EAU) Guidelines Office has set up a guideline working panel to analyse the scientific evidence published in the world literature on lasers in urologic practice. OBJECTIVE: Review the physical background and physiologic and technical aspects of the use of lasers in urology, as well as current clinical results from these new and evolving technologies, together with recommendations for the application of lasers in urology. The primary objective of this structured presentation of the current evidence base in this area is to assist clinicians in making informed choices regarding the use of lasers in their practice. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Structured literature searches using an expert consultant were designed for each section of this document. Searches were carried out in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Medline and Embase on the Dialog/DataStar platform. The controlled terminology of the respective databases was used, and both Medical Subject Headings and EMTREE were analysed for relevant entry terms. One Cochrane review was identified. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Depending on the date of publication, the evidence for different laser treatments is heterogeneous. The available evidence allows treatments to be classified as safe alternatives for the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction in different clinical scenarios, such as refractory urinary retention, anticoagulation, and antiplatelet medication. Laser treatment for bladder cancer should only be used in a clinical trial setting or for patients who are not suitable for conventional treatment due to comorbidities or other complications. For the treatment of urinary stones and retrograde endoureterotomy, lasers provide a standard tool to augment the endourologic procedure. CONCLUSIONS: In benign prostatic obstruction (BPO), laser vaporisation, resection, or enucleation are alternative treatment options. The standard treatment for BPO remains transurethral resection of the prostate for small to moderate size prostates and open prostatectomy for large prostates. Laser energy is an optimal treatment method for disintegrating urinary stones. The use of lasers to treat bladder tumours and in laparoscopy remains investigational.

Clinical outcomes of laparo-endoscopic single-site surgery radical nephrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: The conventional laparoscopic surgery is now paving way to the new technologies including robotic and laparoscopic single-site surgery (LESS). We present our updated experience on LESS radical nephrectomy (LESS-RN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The data from patients undergoing LESS-RN in our two institutions were reviewed along with various clinical and pathological parameters. RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2011, 42 LESS-RN were performed (right = 22, left = 20) with mean (range) age and BMI of 63.7 (33-86) years and 25.1 (18-38.6) kg/m(2), respectively. In addition to the instruments in the single port, one extra 3-mm needlescopic instrument was required in 19 patients (right = 17, left = 2). In three patients, two additional 5-mm trocars and instruments were required. None required open conversion. The recorded adverse events include one bowel injury (intraoperative closure without the need for stoma), one postoperative bleeding requiring blood transfusion, one prolonged ileus, and one deep venous thrombosis. The resected specimens revealed pT1a (n = 3), pT1b (n = 33), pT2a (n = 4), and pT3b (n = 2) tumors. The finding of pT3b was incidental rather than planned procedure. None of the patients had positive margins. CONCLUSION: LESS-RN has proven to be feasible and safe. Beyond cosmesis, further advantages of this approach need to be addressed by randomized trials.

Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery radical nephrectomy.

The indications, instrumentation, surgical technique, and complications of laparoendoscopic single-site radical nephrectomy (LESS-RN) are being described in detail in an attempt to familiarize urologists with this novel laparoscopic technique. Our initial experience of 30 consecutive cases of LESS-RN is reported. The results indicate that, in experienced hands, LESS-RN is feasible and safe, with results comparable to those of conventional laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. Nevertheless, larger series of patients are needed to prove if the increased technical difficulty of LESS-RN justifies its use in routine urologic practice.